BCFN vs. IAT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BCFN (Baron Financials ETF) and IAT (iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF) are both Financials Equities funds - BCFN tracks the Actively Managed while IAT tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Select Regional Banks Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BCFN charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for IAT.

Performance

BCFN vs. IAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Baron Financials ETF (BCFN) and iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF (IAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCFN achieves a -17.02% return, which is significantly lower than IAT's 2.80% return.

BCFN

• 1D: -2.00%
• 1M: -4.60%
• YTD: -17.02%
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IAT

• 1D: -1.71%
• 1M: -1.74%
• YTD: 2.80%
• 6M: 7.09%
• 1Y: 22.99%
• 3Y*: 22.20%
• 5Y*: 1.35%
• 10Y*: 7.95%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BCFN vs. IAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BCFN Baron Financials ETF	-17.02%	0.35%
IAT iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF	2.80%	-0.95%

Correlation

The correlation between BCFN and IAT is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2025	0.45

Return for Risk

BCFN vs. IAT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IAT

IAT Risk / Return Rank: 27
IAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
IAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
IAT Omega Ratio Rank: 29
IAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
IAT Martin Ratio Rank: 25

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BCFN vs. IAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baron Financials ETF (BCFN) and iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF (IAT). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BCFN	IAT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.05	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.26	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-1.70	0.10	-1.79

Drawdowns

BCFN vs. IAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCFN drawdown since its inception was -20.95%, smaller than the maximum IAT drawdown of -77.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCFN and IAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCFN	IAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.95%	-77.22%	+56.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-17.49%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-29.29%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-55.55%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-55.55%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.09%	-9.75%	-9.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.17%	-26.97%	+14.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	6.81%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BCFN	IAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	6.12%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	15.74%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.41%	21.86%	-2.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.41%	29.03%	-9.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.41%	30.78%	-11.37%

BCFN vs. IAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCFN has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than IAT's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCFN vs. IAT - Dividend Comparison

BCFN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.88%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BCFN Baron Financials ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IAT iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF	2.88%	2.94%	2.95%	3.56%	3.12%	1.88%	2.87%	2.49%	2.48%	1.55%	1.52%	1.78%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCFN and IAT in my portfolio?

BCFN and IAT have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BCFN or IAT?

On fees, IAT is cheaper at 0.42% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCFN or IAT?

IAT is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for BCFN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BCFN or IAT?

IAT has the higher dividend yield at 2.88%, compared with 0.00% for BCFN.

What is the main difference between BCFN and IAT?

BCFN tracks Actively Managed, while IAT tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Regional Banks Index. They also come from different issuers: Baron Capital and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for BCFN and 0.42% for IAT.